what to expect from Su-27 module?

[Grim_Smiles]

After the video was created, it has decided not to develop the Su-27SM in favor of the Su-27S.

[SkateZilla]

Im thinkin' the S-27S is better than the SM...

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

Didn't we already have this

in the 1990's? Recently re-installed the 1997 Squadron Commanders Edition and it plays surprisingly well, even with an AMD processor and ATI graphics card ;)
Edited August 14, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[Teknetinium]

After the video was created, it has decided not to develop the Su-27SM in favor of the Su-27S.

 

Sad news Wags. You really know how to make Su-27 fanboys happy and motivated. :censored:

Edited August 14, 2013 by Teknetinium

[Grim_Smiles]

Im thinkin' the S-27S is better than the SM...

 

In terms of the simulation approaching 100% with low speculation (which I'm assuming you meant) - yes, though a painful and reluctant yes.

 

*Sigh* Was really hoping for a R-77 equipped SEAD capable Flanker.:(

[TaliG]

After the video was created, it has decided not to develop the Su-27SM in favor of the Su-27S.

 

:spam_laser::spam_laser::spam_laser: :ufo:

[*Rage*]

After the video was created, it has decided not to develop the Su-27SM in favor of the Su-27S.

 

Desperately sad news:( Thanks for clarifying however. At least we can look forward to the Su25T pit in the meantime.

 

Edit: Could you give us an insight into why? Is there a chance it could be developed at a (much) later date?

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

Could you give us an insight into why?

Maybe it takes more time to develop a realistic simulation of the SM's MFD systems? Anyway, more time to enjoy the outside view ;)

Edited August 14, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[Grim_Smiles]

Edit: Could you give us an insight into why? Is there a chance it could be developed at a (much) later date?

 

Like Hans mentioned, the screens are likely one of the issues. GG had mentioned that there isn't any material at the moment to demonstrate how the MFDs display information for the pilot. There are still photos, but you need more than still images, especially since you don't get to see all the pages accessible to the pilot from a still image.

 

As for whether there are any plans later, Wags would have to answer that, but I'm sure there is always a chance for it to be developed if they are able to get the necessary information down the road. Fingers crossed.

[nap0leonic]

After the video was created, it has decided not to develop the Su-27SM in favor of the Su-27S.

[FlankerNation]

Will pray and hope for a new developer then ?

 

This is a really sad news...... really it breaks my heart.

 

One of my friend got banned from DCS Forum because he describe ED is becoming more like EA. Its really not a good marketing way to tell people in a video that your are doing something for them so they will hang on to DCS and expect better of it and then suddenly you just tell them its not going to happen.

 

I have just downloaded dos version of Flanker 1.0 and Flanker 2.51 going to make a nice tribute video for this remarkable plane.

 

Sorry Wags & ED but you have kill the Flanker ! We Flankers fans only hope that some one (A new Developer) in the future will reboot Flanker. Not really hoping for a third party developer will do Flanker for DCS.

 

Everyone's knows that with an AFM model of Su27s with click-able cockpit will not do good in multiplayer against the F15c, F15E, F18E, F22 and F35A if you don't have EOS, TWS, Cobra, SMART A/G weapons in Flanker.

 

But I m glad that they (ED & Mr. Wags) come clean about this and hopefully they will understand what mistake they are doing ignoring this jet.

 

During the 90's there was one thing in common in the Jet fighter simulation market and that all are based on Western Military Aircraft but no body known that a group of Russian aerospace engineers and developers will bestow upon them the amazing unique Su27 Flanker 1.0.

 

Hopefully, where there's an end there will be a new beginning for this amazing jet.

 

Viva Flanker !.

 

Below is a review of DOS Flanker by WETRA on http://www.old-games.ru/game/411.html.

 

For Computer Simulation 1996 marked the beginning of a significant transition to SVGA graphics modes with resolutions of 640x480 or greater. It is, first of all, it has become necessary to the concept of "simulator" match schedule - after a small panel lettering and especially instrument dials were simply not do it small and readable at 320x200 resolution, so that they do not occupy a significant portion of the screen. A real flight simulator is just implies at least some more or less authentic inscriptions and dashboards with a permanent display of the current information about the flight and the combat situation. Of course, the resolution of 320x200 can not be a serious impediment to creating a good aviasima, of which up to 1996 there were already many, and even fairly well, mainly embody the invincible power of the US Air Forces, but here and there was ...

 

Yes, this is it - Su-27 Flanker, one of the most powerful, is still quoted in the very many countries, multi-role fighter. His appearance was a revolutionary and more enjoyable for the reason that it is significantly more developed simulator is the Soviet military machine, and it is made by Russian developers - Eagle Dynamics!

 

Theatre of war - map of the peninsula of Crimea with relief elements, it is possible to play with the available mission editor military conflicts involving multiple parties: Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, the United States, using the full range of combat missions interaction with non-aviation combat equipment (for example, PVO) and sea-based. Alone how many aircraft types, not to mention the ships, air defense, ground-based technology. In addition to the editing of missions, you can record still and video transmission in a proprietary format *. Trk (for playing the game). There is the possibility of changing weather conditions, visibility, wind drift, time of day. After the mission - very detailed debriefing. You can always based on the results postbrifinga and especially captured video calculate that plane, the pilot of which still managed to knock out your "native" bird. It is possible in this case to beat at the right time dramatically loop to turn 180 degrees - "and bam .. at him, and then another boom like that ...! "- in short, to pay tribute to the enemy volley pair of R-77 in the forehead: it reduces the probability that this time will again be postbrifinge mournful line about who you shot down.

 

And now, the main thing - the simulation. Yes, my dear ossified fans run with a bazooka in anabolic-muscular arms, fans harvesting campaigns megaton bloody meat over the plan in a month, sprinters and long distance runners running around mazes and dungeons, with control in this simulation you basically run into "minor" difficulties. I'm telling you this is because when I was studying, my children, classmates, I was not just a PR Avias this, but the answer is almost always one, like this: "Oh, yes he's got control of Che is complicated key combinations to remember ... ". I believe that in this time management simulator as optimal. Incidentally, I very clearly separating line between the three entities: a professional flight simulator, game aviasima and three-dimensional arcade, which is on someone's very serious miscalculation proudly calls himself a "flight simulator", resembling a bunch of anecdotal "donkey-> stallion." In the gaming simulator, of course, there must be as complete as possible, detailed, functional diagram of management and technical interaction aircraft parts: chassis, the angle of the flaps, failures of individual systems, jammers and other things. But there should be such that, for starting the engines had to constantly perform with two dozen very hard memorable action (MS Flight Simulator, etc.), just like the instructions crew. That is, the functionality of the maximum, but the chain of successive straight-line action as abbreviated as a single key combination - and we are just playing flight simulator. If the control contains only 4 "arrow", a space, and Enter - well, then, sorry to say, this is not a simulator, and the usual 3D-arcade game, a prime example of this can be called psevdosimulyatora F22 Lightning. But we will not go to the side. There is a clear dependence of the airplane on its speed. Flight at a speed of 200 km / h - a complete loss of control, and in the presence of asymmetric thrust - easily stall into a tailspin. And with symmetric thrust to fall into a tailspin - it is also necessary to try: high angles of attack, a sharp drop in speed and some long lateral maneuver with a large angle of heel. Well, what a game developed in the warning system, which displays the different systems out! The most memorable for me once was - is to return from combat air podranennym (burn several indicators of damage to the systems) and has to fall on the final approach to landing with turned off the engine, as the fuel was entirely spent in afterburner. Striking range of missions: the dogfight, and the suppression of air defense forces, the destruction of the enemy airfield runways (very epic type of mission - my favorite), and anti-target bombings mission. Modeled the effects of congestion. Positive overload - blackouts, and in several gradations, negative overload - redness (do not know, not an expert to judge the adequacy of the color aspects of this effect).

 

On the "amenities". A clear win-interface, comfortable setting. Compared with the first version (DOS) of the game has not changed substantially. It is worth noting spawn numerous patches just for Win-version v1.5. We have been offered to turn our aircraft in the MiG-23, MiG-29, Su-39, but the truth, without changing the type of instrument panels in the cockpit. In later versions of the game is still being implemented, but for now can only change the look of your airplane and possibly its performance. But the most useful and outstanding su27dtch patch was made to create a pilot without the possibility of landing gear "in the belly" and landing on water (of course, pre-specified rate of descent and horizontal flight speed). As in the original version of the game on a daring developers simply did not occur.

 

Later on, I would like to tell you about the continuation of the game Su-27 Flanker v.2.0., V.2.5 and Lock On: Flaming Cliffs. Formally, this is actually an individual game, and for some reason at the moment they can not be available for download, so they are, even if small, is beyond the scope of this review.

 

VERDICT: A serious, detailed and most importantly, very playable simulation of domestic military aircraft, as close as possible to the reality of combat multi-purpose fighter in almost the entire range versions. Fans of arcade flight urge not bother ...

Review author: WERTA

[Rikus]

Guns, no more reasons to live :P

[Flying Penguin]

Well, whilst it would be nice to have a companion fighter to the later model F-15s and the new (and somewhat speculative imvho) US and European models in the works, if the ED view is that they can get significantly closer to 100% accuracy with the S than the SM, then personally I'd rather have the S.

 

The Flanker is a beautiful aircraft and I'd love to have my grubby mitts on any DCS level module for it, however the lifeblood of DCS (as opposed to FC) is accuracy, and I'm sorry but "hypothetical" system* data just doesn't cut it.

 

It's been publicly stated by ED team and testers that multiplayer is only a small portion of the community, so please, don't abandon all plans for an SU-27** for the sake of multi-player balance, just because it's not quite the same era as the matching US jets.

 

And on the plus side, once you have a top notch SU27, if and when data becomes available to model the SM, you're already half way there :)

 

Cheers,

 

Jamie

*Same goes for performance data, but I doubt that is the issue here.

**Not that I seriously think they really have or will (it would sell like hotcakes, in spite of the detractors), but it's worth putting as a counterpoint to the cries of those who would have an SM or nothing....

Edited August 15, 2013 by Flying Penguin

[Flying Penguin]

Guns, no more reasons to live :P

 

Do we need to set up a Flanker fan suicide hotline?

 

:music_whistling:

[otto]

Wow so people that like western aircraft get :F18 ,F14,Eurofighter, F15E, F18E, F22 and F35A , harrier and a ton others.

People that like russian aircraft get nothing.

So i guess we will fight online f15 vs f 18 or something.Realistic ?

Edited August 15, 2013 by otto

[Cedaway]

Can't figure why it is too much complicated to develop the SM version. Is it a question of accuracy of sources? Or is it too challenging to code? Or is it just a choice of the team?

[GC1993]

Can't figure why it is too much complicated to develop the SM version. Is it a question of accuracy of sources? Or is it too challenging to code? Or is it just a choice of the team?

 

I think there's just limited data available for the avionics, as they're one of the most substantial differences between the S and the SM. Someone earlier suggested they couldn't obtain enough MFD data either, which is understandable.

 

Remember, ED know that the Flanker is among the most popular fixed wing fighters for development, and they also know that those fans would largely prefer fideltity and authenticity than 30% guessing and assumptions.

On that note I think they'd rather develop the S which they can model very accurately (I should hope if it's going to be a seperate DCS title), than attempt the more modern SM and leave lots of the real-life abilities, switches, functions, avioncs etc out because there simply wasn't the available data to recreate it.

[nap0leonic]

what about exported flankers? is there also no leaked info?

[Flying Penguin]

what about exported flankers? is there also no leaked info?

 

I suspect (although I clearly can't confirm) that there is no information available (in sufficient detail) for export Flankers for exactly the same reason that there's limited data about non-export Flankers, i.e. any nation smart and rich enough to operate modern Flankers is also smart and rich enough to implement and rigorously enforce information classification systems and, short of actual international spying, it's not worth having your proverbial nuts cut off to leak the inner workings of the SM's electronics to the world and his flight simulator playing dog....

[GGTharos]

I don't believe there is enough publicly available information on the Su-27SM for ED to a DCS module (but perhaps they will consider making an FC level module of it?)

ED is based in Russia, not the USA. If there is leaked info and they do use it, they can quite easily end up being accused of treason.

[Rotorhead]

And I was looking forward SO MUCH to fly a multirole Flanker one day... :cry:

 

I mean, I will buy any DCS-level Flanker at the day one no matter what, but no R-77's, no MFD's, no A/G guided weapons, no nothing? Sad day indeed.

 

However, thank you Wags for keeping us updated, no matter if good or bad news.

[Grim_Smiles]

Everyone's knows that with an AFM model of Su27s with click-able cockpit will not do good in multiplayer against the F15c, F15E, F18E, F22 and F35A if you don't have EOS, TWS, Cobra, SMART A/G weapons in Flanker.

 

Rather bleak and incorrect view, think you are selling the Flanker quite short.

 

F-22 and F-35A should be taken out of the equation because even a Gen 4+ fighter will be given a run for their money, and I'm willing to bet that a lot of server admins and missions designers will not allow the use of these fighters - especially if there are older aircraft being used.

 

There are people complaining about the Huey and MiG-21, but these individuals are missing the glaring point that DCS will cover all eras. You simply fly missions and servers that include planes from that era. If you want to fly outside that fighter's generation you do so with the understanding that it'll be more of a challenge.

 

The only thing from your list that I don't see ending up in an Su-27S is the smart A2G munitions - and smart bombs have no bearing on whether this aircraft can be a good fighter against the ones you listed. Everything else should be there with an accurate simulation. I know this thread turned to garbage over the cobra (and I don't want to see that nonsense start up again), but the point that seemed to be missed is that no flight model of the Flanker is going to be accurate if you can't do the same maneuvers that the real thing can.

 

Doesn't matter whether or not it is useful in combat - all this arguing missed the real point that if they make DCS: Su-27S and you can't do the maneuver the flight model is not accurate. End of story. So I can't see ED leaving out something like that, regardless of what anyone thinks of it. Whether the cobra makes it into the FC3 Su-27 AFM I can't say and it may or may not make it in. But if they slap DCS: Su-27S on the title and advertise it as being like A-10C that is a different story - the cobra should be there in that case.

 

I think a good pilot can do just fine in combat against the aircraft you listed with an Su-27S (again barring the F22 and F35). Especially since from what I understand the average DCS multiplayer pilot (circle one):

1. Flies like a drunken orangutan

2. Doesn't know what the hell they are doing (I fall into this category at the moment)

3. All of the above

 

While it is disappointing to not have an SM in the works, things aren't as bleak for flanker fans as the picture you are painting. No need to start sorting your firearms by barrel flavor.

[Exorcet]

If it is an issue of accuracy, then this is why I'm so adamant about DCS being about modeling to the highest fidelity possible. I was looking forward to Su-27SM. Flanker is a great aircraft, but the older Russian cockpits aren't too friendly to me, and I'd like to see a bit more modern side to the plane.

 

If you have to call it DCS lite, then do so, but just because the Su-27 can't be done to A-10 levels doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

 

Still, a DCS Su-27 of any level is appreciated, and I think there is more than enough room in DCS for different variations and generations of the same aircraft. That said, if we have early model Soviet hardware, why not add some DCS F-15A and F-16A? The latter in particular would make the Su-27S feel like a luxury car.

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

Flanker fanboys galore ...

The question begs, what would you rather have; a poorly modeled Su-27SM or a precisely modeled S? Or, no Flanker at all ...

Some like the old stuff you know ;)

Edited August 15, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[GC1993]

Flanker fanboys galore ...

The question begs, what would you rather have; a poorly modeled Su-27SM or a precisely modeled S? Or, no Flanker at all ...

 

My point exactly a few posts pack, they need to decide what they want from ED more, their beloved modern flanker in semi DCS detail, or an older S modeled to DCS quality.